Couple more things I’ve been thinking of - sorry if they seem like a hijack, have been done to death before, or would be more appropriate in another thread.
Let’s say you have an experience that seems to you to suggest the supernatural. Say you and your parents are thinking about your sick uncle and he calls at that moment. You are unsure how to assess this, so you go for a walk.
Let’s say you meet three people and tell them your story. The first says, "That is proof of a benevolent intercessionary God."
The second says, “A good witch sensed your distress and cast a spell to make your uncle call you.” (Apologies to Wiccans for misrepresentation of their beliefs).
The third says, "The microchips the aliens implanted in your uncle’s brain is obviously working."
Which interpretation do you accept? I do not see why one of these is any more reasonable to accept than the other, or infinite other possible supernatural “explanations” from ESP, to ghosts, and IPUs.
So you keep walking and meet a fourth person. And he says, "Wow, what a wacky coincidence. Is this a neat world or what! But you probably don’t recall all of the times you were thinking about family members and the DID NOT call. No reason to worry about the reason or dwell on what it means. Just appreciate it and go on to live your life as best you can."
How does this explanation hold up to the others?
Now let’s add some more wrinkles, and flesh out these strangers you meet.
Let’s say the first one, advancing God as an explanation, is an old bum who lives in a box under a bridge. He seems unclean and unhealthy, and everyone you know questions his sanity.
Person #2, the witch fan, is a beautiful member of the gender you find most attractive, and you sense that this discussion might present an opportunity for you to get in his/her pants. But, you sense that accepting these beliefs will estrange you from your family.
Person 3, the UFOlogist, is a respected family member, considered by everyone you know to be wise, loving, and reasonable, with a wide circle of close friends who meet frequently to discuss the latest in alien technology.
Do these factors affect which belief you accept? Obviously, any of these or multiple other descriptions could be assigned to any of the three.
What if the 4th guy, the coincidence advocate, tells you there is this big fancy building where he and other rational humanists meet to discuss science and reason, and to celebrate human nature. They have special music, recreational activities, and even schools for children as well as adults. They have active political action committees. You feel that getting closer to this fellow will give you an already formed support group. Members of his group have their own country clubs, special holidays, business networks, etc. You see where I’m going here.
My point is not to convince you to believe one thing or another. Just suggesting you not discount the various factors that may contribute to your accepting and maintaining a certain belief system.
Additional issue which I don’t believe has not come up in this particular thread, but people often say God is necessary to explain their “purpose.”
Many if not most nonbelievers are content to accept that there is no divinely ordained purpose.
If you really want a purpose, you could take a page from Gould and others and suggest the universe, or at least our corner of it, serves to support the development of bacteria. Humans are an evolutionary dead end - there are far fewer primate species than previously. Meanwhile bacteria are thriving. So maybe God “created” humans to provide hosts for bacteria. They live all over us both inside and out. Everywhere we look we seem to find new species - underground, undersea, underice in Antarctica… When we manipulate the environment, we are just creating new evolutionary opportunities for bacteria and other organisms. And when we die, we rot and provide opportunities for other critters.
Just a pleasant thought. 
